Jesuit superior general: ‘We have formed symbolic figures such as the devil to express evil’

  • Thread starter Thread starter Theodora
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The devil exists and we must fight against him," Pope Francis warned.
 
Stat_Crux said:
If accurate, this is a disgraceful interview.

I just can’t understand, as a convert to the faith, the dissatisfaction some catholics feel with long-settled Catholic teaching, or their need to trouble faithful Catholics with such public speculation. What does he think he will achieve other than sow discord and confusion?

I can only hope this is an error with the translation; an excuse we’ve had to use a lot recently.
Click to expand...
Please stop with the bad translation excuse to hide from the reality that the Church has entered into a dire period. If anything, English speaking Catholics have been protected from the worst of what is being said and preached by our “leaders”.

Here is a link to the original interview elmundo.es/papel/lideres/2017/05/31/592d806d268e3e1a7c8b476c.html

This is the actual answer, not too difficult to understand.

Para terminar quería preguntarle si cree que el mal es un proceso de la psicología humana o proviene de una entidad superior.
Desde mi punto de vista, el mal forma parte del misterio de la libertad. Si el ser humano es libre, puede elegir entre el bien y el mal. Los cristianos creemos que estamos hechos a imagen y semejanza de Dios, por lo tanto Dios es libre, pero Dios siempre elige hacer el bien porque es todo bondad. Hemos hecho figuras simbólicas, como el diablo, para expresar el mal. Los condicionamientos sociales también representan esa figura, ya que hay gente que actúa así porque está en un entorno donde es muy difícil hacer lo contrario.
 
Origen52 said:
Please stop with the bad translation excuse to hide from the reality that the Church has entered into a dire period. If anything, English speaking Catholics have been protected from the worst of what is being said and preached by our “leaders”.

Here is a link to the original interview elmundo.es/papel/lideres/2017/05/31/592d806d268e3e1a7c8b476c.html

This is the actual answer, not too difficult to understand.

Para terminar quería preguntarle si cree que el mal es un proceso de la psicología humana o proviene de una entidad superior.
Desde mi punto de vista, el mal forma parte del misterio de la libertad. Si el ser humano es libre, puede elegir entre el bien y el mal. Los cristianos creemos que estamos hechos a imagen y semejanza de Dios, por lo tanto Dios es libre, pero Dios siempre elige hacer el bien porque es todo bondad. Hemos hecho figuras simbólicas, como el diablo, para expresar el mal. Los condicionamientos sociales también representan esa figura, ya que hay gente que actúa así porque está en un entorno donde es muy difícil hacer lo contrario./QUOTE

Jesus is not describing an “idea”, or a “concept " when he tells us that the devil is " a liar, and a murderer from the beginning”. To refute this is simply refuting Christ Himself. This comment really evokes the " New Age Spirituality" ethos. This man needs to turn in his collar and move out to the “Bacca” ranch where he can commune with the rest of the moral relativistic elites.

One could imagine this man describing the angelic announcement to Our Lady as having been merely an optimistic dream, or some sort of hallucination. He must be held accountable in this instance, for as a high church official, he is reaching the masses with his heresy. This is a grave circumstance.
Click to expand...
 
There is no doubt the devil is very real. Whether or not he is the anthropomorphized humanoid with a pitchfork and a pointy tale that he is normally depicted as, is another matter.

The Church teaches he is a fallen angel. Angels are spiritual beings. Nobody has ever seen an angel, unlike Jesus Himself who existed in the flesh, with eyewitness accounts of him living, eating, working and teaching among us. Thus we know was a human person in addition to being God. The depiction of the devil as a “person” is symbolic in the sense that it is imagery to make his very real existence seem more palpable to those who may come under his influence.

We similarly know that angels exist from, for example, the Annunciation. But their depiction as little cherubs with wings playing the harp is purely symbolic.

Regardless of how he is depicted, Satan is very real. The symbolism is in the imagery, not the existence. I suspect this is what the Jesuit was trying to convey.
 
OraLabora said:
There is no doubt the devil is very real. Whether or not he is the anthropomorphized humanoid with a pitchfork and a pointy tale that he is normally depicted as, is another matter.

The Church teaches he is a fallen angel. Angels are spiritual beings. Nobody has ever seen an angel, unlike Jesus Himself who existed in the flesh, with eyewitness accounts of him living, eating, working and teaching among us. Thus we know was a human person in addition to being God. **The depiction of the devil as a “person” is symbolic in the sense that it is imagery to make his very real existence seem more palpable to those who may come under his influence.
**
We similarly know that angels exist from, for example, the Annunciation. But their depiction as little cherubs with wings playing the harp is purely symbolic.

Regardless of how he is depicted, Satan is very real. The symbolism is in the imagery, not the existence. I suspect this is what the Jesuit was trying to convey.
Click to expand...
The sentence in bold is not consistent with Catholic teaching. Yes, the devil is a (separate) person, though he is not a human person. Depicting the devil as a person is not to make him seem more palpable, but is reality.
In 2017, the common error is not that he has a pointy tail. The common error in 2017 is not that angels play the harp. The current common error is that angels in general, including the devil, are sort of blurred, misty expressions, (perhaps all one blurred expression); a poetic way of communicating some truth, like Noah’s Ark and the “worldwide” flood teaches us a lesson, not about boat building.

The devil’s personhood is a reality, regardless of how he is depicted. The New Age religion teaches that we create our own realities by how we depict or define things - including angels. I am not saying you are New Age, just pointing out that is a road others have followed, to erroneous concepts of angels and devils.

A good teacher refutes the current, commonly held error, and affirms those truths which are **currently **forgotten. He failed to do that.
 
commenter said:
The sentence in bold is not consistent with Catholic teaching. Yes, the devil is a (separate) person, though he is not a human person. Depicting the devil as a person is not to make him seem more palpable, but is reality.
In 2017, the common error is not that he has a pointy tail. The common error in 2017 is not that angels play the harp. The current common error is that angels in general, including the devil, are sort of blurred, misty expressions, (perhaps all one blurred expression); a poetic way of communicating some truth, like Noah’s Ark and the “worldwide” flood teaches us a lesson, not about boat building.

The devil’s personhood is a reality, regardless of how he is depicted. The New Age religion teaches that we create our own realities by how we depict or define things - including angels. I am not saying you are New Age, just pointing out that is a road others have followed, to erroneous concepts of angels and devils.

A good teacher refutes the current, commonly held error, and affirms those truths which are **currently **forgotten. He failed to do that.
Click to expand...
Note the quotation marks around person. My notion is that he is not a “physical” person in the sense he has a body of flesh and blood. The Church teaches that angels are spiritual beings, not physical beings, and that Satan is a fallen angel. That he is a real being, there can be no doubt. But he is spirit, not physical.
 
OraLabora said:
Note the quotation marks around person. My notion is that he is not a “physical” person in the sense he has a body of flesh and blood. The Church teaches that angels are spiritual beings, not physical beings, and that Satan is a fallen angel. That he is a real being, there can be no doubt. But he is spirit, not physical.
Click to expand...
agreed!
 
Philadelphia, Pa., Jun 7, 2017 / 12:04 am (CNA/EWTN News).- A society that relies on reason and technology, without faith, risks forgetting God and making a deal with the devil, Archbishop Charles J. Chaput of Philadelphia has warned.
Click to expand...
“We’re in a struggle for souls. Our adversary is the devil. And while Satan is not God’s equal and doomed to final defeat, he can do bitter harm in human affairs,” Archbishop Chaput said. “The first Christians knew this. We find their awareness written on nearly every page of the New Testament.”
Click to expand...
Writing in his June 5 column for Catholic Philly, titled “Sympathy for the Devil”, he said: “The modern world makes it hard to believe in the devil. But it treats Jesus Christ the same way. And that’s the point.”
Click to expand...
catholicnewsagency.com/news/mythologizing-the-devil-wont-end-well-archbishop-chaput-warns-59628/
 
I remembered reading alot of things where people in the past used to blame satan/ demons for all kinds of things, but in modern times, ‘experts’ have given us natural explanations for many of these things…Im kind of thinking maybe those people were right all along, and its the modern world who is complicit in making the devil a myth.

Just look at all the threads on CAF, whenever demonic activity is theorized, its the absolute last thing many will even say is possible, a ‘natural explanation’ is always thought to be the most probable, but when in reality, if Satan/demons have this ability, it should be the first thing that comes to mind.

I have a feeling if we were to know how involved satan/ demons are in our world and everything they had a hand in, we would probably not believe it.
 
mikekle said:
I remembered reading alot of things where people in the past used to blame satan/ demons for all kinds of things, but in modern times, ‘experts’ have given us natural explanations for many of these things…Im kind of thinking maybe those people were right all along, and its the modern world who is complicit in making the devil a myth.

Just look at all the threads on CAF, whenever demonic activity is theorized, its the absolute last thing many will even say is possible, a ‘natural explanation’ is always thought to be the most probable, but when in reality, if Satan/demons have this ability, it should be the first thing that comes to mind.

I have a feeling if we were to know how involved satan/ demons are in our world and everything they had a hand in, we would probably not believe it.
Click to expand...
Well said.

Mary.
 
mikekle said:
I remembered reading alot of things where people in the past used to blame satan/ demons for all kinds of things, but in modern times, ‘experts’ have given us natural explanations for many of these things…Im kind of thinking maybe those people were right all along, and its the modern world who is complicit in making the devil a myth.

Just look at all the threads on CAF, whenever demonic activity is theorized, its the absolute last thing many will even say is possible, a ‘natural explanation’ is always thought to be the most probable, but when in reality, if Satan/demons have this ability, it should be the first thing that comes to mind.

I have a feeling if we were to know how involved satan/ demons are in our world and everything they had a hand in, we would probably not believe it.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

This is why I don’t understand the practice of Exorcists sending those who come to them, to psychologists, as a first base. The first thing apparently to diagnose is mental illness, and while in some cases that might be the case, surely the first thing to diagnose ought to be whether the person is suffering from some form of diabolic infiltration. It is like putting secular health ideas (not all of which are wrong) ahead of the spiritual. Sometimes, people need both, even, but if people go to exorcists, then I think they ought to be seen and diagnosed first as being possessed or not on some level.

Apparently, Exorcists only actually have to perform a very small number of exorcisms in response to the amount of people who come to them and yet this is hardly surprising if the majority of those people are immediately being sent away. Even if a person is helped with some subtle mental problem, doesn’t still negate the possibility of possession, and need for help in spiritual matters. I actually think it is patronizing for people to be turned away when they have come forward saying that they believe Satan is persecuting them in a way that is too much for them - as if they ought to first be disbelieved.

Back on topic, this Archbishop has things the right way around, compared to someone quoted in an article I read the other day in a position of authority, who was reported as stating pretty much the opposite.
 
This Archbishop seams to be quoted a lot for his steadfast orthodox views. I appreciate his example.
 
friardchips said:
Agreed.

This is why I don’t understand the practice of Exorcists sending those who come to them, to psychologists, as a first base. The first thing apparently to diagnose is mental illness, and while in some cases that might be the case, surely the first thing to diagnose ought to be whether the person is suffering from some form of diabolic infiltration. It is like putting secular health ideas (not all of which are wrong) ahead of the spiritual. Sometimes, people need both, even, but if people go to exorcists, then I think they ought to be seen and diagnosed first as being possessed or not on some level.

Apparently, Exorcists only actually have to perform a very small number of exorcisms in response to the amount of people who come to them and yet this is hardly surprising if the majority of those people are immediately being sent away. Even if a person is helped with some subtle mental problem, doesn’t still negate the possibility of possession, and need for help in spiritual matters. I actually think it is patronizing for people to be turned away when they have come forward saying that they believe Satan is persecuting them in a way that is too much for them - as if they ought to first be disbelieved.

Back on topic, this Archbishop has things the right way around, compared to someone quoted in an article I read the other day in a position of authority, who was reported as stating pretty much the opposite.
Click to expand...
I understand your point and I do agree the Church should look to the spiritual well being of its members. I do agree that having a person evaluated for mental health issues first is the way to go. I have worked in the Mental Health "area for years and many mental illnesses can cause sever delusions and actions that may cause concern to others when in fact its their mental illness.

I don’t think we’d have the resources to first evaluate whether they have some sort of demonic influence in their lives.
Blessings,
Mary.
 
MaryT777 said:
I understand your point and I do agree the Church should look to the spiritual well being of its members. I do agree that having a person evaluated for mental health issues first is the way to go. I have worked in the Mental Health "area for years and many mental illnesses can cause sever delusions and actions that may cause concern to others when in fact its their mental illness.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the insight and feedback. 🙂
I don’t think we’d have the resources to first evaluate whether they have some sort of demonic influence in their lives.
Blessings,
Mary.
Click to expand...
The Church could ensure that all priests have training in the area of Exorcism!.
 
MaryT777 said:
I understand your point and I do agree the Church should look to the spiritual well being of its members. I do agree that having a person evaluated for mental health issues first is the way to go. I have worked in the Mental Health "area for years and many mental illnesses can cause sever delusions and actions that may cause concern to others when in fact its their mental illness.

I don’t think we’d have the resources to first evaluate whether they have some sort of demonic influence in their lives.
Blessings,
Mary.
Click to expand...
I agree that they need to evaluate for mental illness first. It could be devastating to a person with mental illness if they were to have deliverance/exorcism tried first.
 
ChurchSoldier said:
This Archbishop seams to be quoted a lot for his steadfast orthodox views. I appreciate his example.
Click to expand...
Archbishop Chaput is clearly responding the that heresy regarding the devil that was unfortunately spewed out by the leader of the Jesuits. Bravo! Archbishop Chaput has always been, for me, a man of great insight, and my favorite American prelate. He always comes right to the heart of an issue, and he is bold in his faith. The Church is lucky to have him. We need many more like him.
 
Dorothy said:
I agree that they need to evaluate for mental illness first. It could be devastating to a person with mental illness if they were to have deliverance/exorcism tried first.
Click to expand...
I don’t think that anything is “tried” without the priest listening to the concerns of those who come to him. It is after debate and prayer, and I would imagine, preparation, that someone is exorcised.

So surely, a person could be diagnosed first at this stage without being passed on instead of it being automatic. If someone is suffering from diabolic infiltration of some kind then it will be obvious to a certain degree by the information given to the priest. No harm would be done to the person (and a blessing is never a bad thing).

However, if the person goes to a secular health practice then they might be able to tell the person is not well, but it is unlikely that they would refer the person back to the priest in most cases, for obvious reasons, and the person would probably be given tablets instead or some advice equaling something along the lines of a diet change. This is all well and good if the person is ill and not infected with demonic attacks but definitely not okay if so.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top